51–60 of 309 posts
Wait so the phones cause cancer people were right?
The WHO said so: https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.... (Not that I trust the WHO, but just saying)
Damn that's dangerous level of radiation, why this was only discovered recently?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The WHO said so: https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.... (Not that I trust the WHO, but just saying)
It's pretty clearly not though. We've had a huge adoption of mobile phones in a very short time, and we've seen no corresponding signal in the cancer rates across the globe. So the effect size is bounded to some extremely low value, probably zero.
https://www.efpia.eu/publications/cancer-comparator-report/c...
> Cancer incidence across Europe has risen by approximately 50% over the past two decades from 2.1 million to 3.1 million cases between 1995 and 2018 in Europe.
Hmmm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Individual countries within the EU have their own regulators who make their own enforcement decisions. The EU isn't a super-state and EU law isn't applied by some overarching entity. On a technical level, each country ratifies and applies their own laws in their own ways. Given this, other countries could act on this too, but it's the French regulator who has chosen to do so.
> The EU isn't a super-state and EU law isn't applied by some overarching entity Yes-and-no: the EU Commission serves as the "executive branch" ( Americanisms... ) of the EU, and while the EU isn't a true federal superstate union yet , but there's enough similarities that the EU Commission probably does 80% of the work it would be doing if the EU were. While the majority of EU directives are enforced by member states…
That's not an "Americanism". It's a principle of the separation of powers and I imagine it dates back to the "Europeanianist" Englightenment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the parent comment was poking fun at apple telling consumers they were holding the phones wrong, back when the case was part of the antenna and calls would drop.
Ahhh, another instance of Poe's law.
You are welcome
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not right, but influential on EU regulators. Hopefully EU citizens find such results as a mark of shame rather than pride and move towards fact-based policy. Emotion-based policy is dangerous.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty clearly not though. We've had a huge adoption of mobile phones in a very short time, and we've seen no corresponding signal in the cancer rates across the globe. So the effect size is bounded to some extremely low value, probably zero.
> It's pretty clearly not though. We've had a huge adoption of mobile phones in a very short time, and we've seen no corresponding signal in the cancer rates across the globe. So the effect size is bounded to some extremely low value, probably zero. https://www.efpia.eu/publications/cancer-comparator-report/c... > Cancer incidence across Europe has risen by approximately 50% over the past two decades from 2.1 million…
Besides, there are numerous of other sources of radiation that is much stronger, including visible lights. You should ban visible light before you ban mobile phones! This stuff is ridiculous,